User Profile: Atrum_Angelus

Atrum_Angelus

Member Since: March 14, 2013

Comments

123 To page: Go
  • [5] May 22, 2015 at 4:06pm

    An illegally obtained document doesn’t make the contains incorrect. A forged document, most likely. But an illegally obtained official document is still an official document.

    I guess we’ll just have to wait and see how this story unfolds.

  • [11] May 22, 2015 at 3:33pm

    Then they obtained Sealed documents illegally. Which would align with the reports coming about today of the documents being approved for destruction. Either way, the reports are out in the open, and Josh Duggar has publicly admitted to the wrong doing without disagreeing with any of the reports content. My original point (“That is not simply teenage hormones”) remains.

  • [5] May 22, 2015 at 3:09pm

    Barber2 – the link I provided above has the documents. As do several other sites. And I’ve been here for years. I listen to Patriot radio, which is how I learned of the site.

  • [3] May 22, 2015 at 2:58pm

    @2God – It’s official because there was a court hearing yesterday relating to the documents. One of the victims asked a judge to destroy the police report and all documents relating to the case in fear of an unredated version getting out with the victims names included. The judge granted the request.

  • [15] May 22, 2015 at 2:42pm

    http://www.rawstory.com/2015/05/police-report-reveals-josh-duggar-was-accused-of-molesting-young-girls-as-a-teen-including-his-sisters/

    Whether or not the police report was obtained legally or not (or whether I like that it was or not) is irrelevant to the substance of the report itself. Either way, it is an official report obtained through FOIA. Don’t try to change the subject. The acts described within the report are disgusting and should be reviled by anyone (regardless of politics or religion) who reads them. Not defended.

  • [32] May 22, 2015 at 2:04pm

    “James (Jim Bob) said that about 9 months later, in March of 2003, there was another incident. James said [[Redacted]] was reading to [[Redacted]] and [[Redacted]] was sitting on (his) lap, (he) had touched [[Redacted]] bre*sts and v*ginal area. James said that [[Redacted]] then ran out of the room and called [[Redacted]] and told [[Redacted]] what (he – Josh) had done. James also said that sometime during this time frame, [[Redacted]] has been standing in the laundry room and (Josh) had put (his) hand under [[Redacted]] dress.” – Jim Bob’s statement to police, police report page 15.

    That is not simply teenage hormones.

    Responses (14) +
  • [9] May 22, 2015 at 1:20pm

    4EverHis – He was 14 according to that very police report. The first incident quoted was March 2002. His birthday is in March 1988.

  • [10] May 22, 2015 at 11:23am

    Phoo, he was 14 according the the police report.
    http://www.intouchweekly.com/posts/bombshell-duggar-police-report-jim-bob-duggar-didn-t-report-son-josh-s-alleged-sex-offenses-for-more-than-a-year-58906

  • [7] May 22, 2015 at 10:40am

    There is a police report from 2006 that was gained through FOI. Authorities were called. They just didn’t do anything.

  • [1] May 22, 2015 at 10:34am

    monkeyshines, considering the report talks of “b reasts” (not sure if the word is censored here), I’m guessing the sisters involved were the eldest four. Which would mean the ages would be 12, 11, 9 and 8. I’m not saying this makes it any better, but judging from the show, he’s closest to those four sisters.

    Also, not all of them were asleep. According to one report, one of them was reading when he committed the act. Which is even more disturbing.

  • May 21, 2015 at 3:22pm

    “Legal” being the operative word there.

  • [6] May 15, 2015 at 11:16am

    The Big-Bang hasn’t been recently proven wrong. Just questioned with a very strong hypothesis. The hypothesis still needs to go through a lot of testing before it throws the Big Bang Theory out.
    And yes, theories can be proven wrong. Something else just needs to go through all the same trials and testing before we agree that the new line of thought is the most likely to have occurred. Welcome to Science.

  • [9] May 15, 2015 at 10:24am

    “I am disturbed to see McDonald’s ads appearing once again on episodes of Fox’s Family Guy;”

    So, you’re watching Family Guy then…

    Responses (2) +
  • May 14, 2015 at 4:42pm

    The other figure I thought was really interesting was the “income by religion” with respect to the Unaffiliated – Nothing in particular (with it’s subcategories “religion important” and “religion not important”).

    http://www.pewforum.org/files/2015/05/RLS-05-08-full-report.pdf

  • [2] May 14, 2015 at 4:24pm

    The full report from Pew actually shows where people are moving to. Roughly half of those going from unaffiliated to affiliated went to one form or another of Christianity. Strangely, a large chunk (12%) went to Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormon (8%). That’s quite a shift in belief.
    Catholics saw the largest amount leave to “unaffiliated” (28% of those polled who identify as unaffiliated but were raised Catholic).

    Responses (1) +
  • May 14, 2015 at 4:15pm

    The prediction of the religious make up of the world by 2050:
    http://www.pewforum.org/2015/04/02/religious-projections-2010-2050/

    Responses (2) +
  • [8] May 14, 2015 at 3:47pm

    I actually posted the pew figures in another article showing this. They are certainly interesting numbers. I think it also goes with a lot of non-believing individuals looking into the Bible themselves. Many go into it out of curiosity and others to look for counters to theists. Either way, it’s not really surprising that some would come out of that believers. I was surprised to see that it was almost 50% though.

    Responses (3) +
  • [6] May 14, 2015 at 2:36pm

    There is an interesting figure in those latest Pew figures. Everyone is latching on to the movement of people from faith to “unaffiliated”. But what no one is talking about is the movement of people from atheism to faith. 1 in 5 people raised in a community of faith now identify as non-religious. However, nearly half of everyone raised with no religion are now part of a religion.

  • May 14, 2015 at 1:28pm

    Yeah, reading it certainly didn’t make me go “Oh Yes! This is so good! I should convert to this awesome faith and make sure everyone follows this!”

  • [2] May 14, 2015 at 11:10am

    As much as it makes me wonder, I also own a Quran (though a considerably less ostentatious looking one), so I can’t really condemn her for simply having one.

    Responses (1) +
123 To page: Go
Restoring Love